[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45E7509E.7090000@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 14:15:58 -0800
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, suparna@...ibm.com,
cmm@...ibm.com, alex@...sterfs.com, suzuki@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate()
Alan wrote:
> ENOSYS indicates quite different things and ENOTTY is also used for
> syscalls. I still think ENOTTY is correct.
>
Yes, ENOSYS tends to me "operation flat out not support" rather than
"not on this object". I think we can do better than ENOTTY though -
ENOTSUP for example (modulo the confusion over EOPNOTSUPP).
(You can tell the patch has very little real substance if we're arguing
over errnos at this point :)
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists